<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/26/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Tim Peters</b> <<a href="mailto:tim.peters@gmail.com">tim.peters@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
[Bob Ippolito]<br>> Given the interchangeability of int and<br>> long, I don't foresee any other complications with this change.<br>><br>> Thoughts?<br><br>+1, and for 2.5. Even int() doesn't always return an int anymore, and it's just stupid to bear the burden of an unbounded long when it's not really needed.
</blockquote><div><br>Completely agreed. We've been unifying longs and integers for whole releases, I cannot imagine anyone not getting the hint. Ints and longs are the same thing, deal with it. Whether you get an int or a long for a particular value is a platform-dependant accident anyway (people seem to be ignoring 64-bit hardware all the time... I know Tim does :)
<br></div></div><br>-- <br>Thomas Wouters <<a href="mailto:thomas@python.org">thomas@python.org</a>><br><br>Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!